Rep. Joe Heck: I blame administration, not Susan Rice

A Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee said Thursday that while he doesn’t blame U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice for intelligence failures concerning attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, he does want the hearings that kick off Thursday to provide some answers.

“I’m not blaming Ambassador Rice,” said Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.) on CNN’s “Starting Point.” “What I’m blaming is the administration for not putting forward the information they had in a quick enough manner to put clarity to the situation to the American people and to the families of those that were lost. We still have conflicting information between the intelligence community and the administration, and that’s what we hope to get to the bottom of today.”

Text Size

Heck’s comments, which came several hours before a committee hearing on Benghazi, also followed a war of words exchanged indirectly between President Barack Obama and GOP senators, including John McCain, over Rice. McCain and other Republicans have said they would block an appointment of Rice to serve as secretary of state, citing her role in dissemination of information about Benghazi that was later proved to be incorrect. Obama on Wednesday fired back.

“If Sen. McCain and Sen. [Lindsey] Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me,” Obama said at a news conference. “And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”

Following the Benghazi attacks, Rice made the rounds on Sunday talk shows and said the violence directed at the U.S. Consulate there appeared to be the result of “spontaneous” demonstrations, based on intelligence at the time — a statement that was ultimately walked back by intelligence officials. Heck charged that Rice was serving as a “sacrificial lamb” for the administration.

“They put forward really a sacrificial lamb in Ambassador Rice,” he said. “Somebody who could go out, make statements, then they could claim deniability after the information was proven to be wrong.”

Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, referenced Obama’s defense of Rice on CNN’s “Starting Point” and said the committee “received the same information initially.”

“From what I know, this is only from more media accounts than anything else — but the information Rice received from the administration, that information is what she knew at that time,” he said. “Whether she knew other information, whether she told the truth, is not the issue here. The president made a comment yesterday that she received information from his administration, and that’s what she went forward with. That is one of the issues, one of the concerns we had, because we on the intelligence committee received the same information initially.”

Ruppersberger, who said some members were briefed by intelligence officials ahead of the full committee hearing, added that “a lot of that is being cleared up.”

He wouldn’t comment on whether he would support Rice for secretary of state.

“As far as I know, she’s doing a good job,” Ruppersberger said. “It’s up to the president and up to the Senate and what information comes out about her and about her conduct and about her job.”

Readers' Comments (15)

Total collapse of integrity, honesty, transparency, timeliness and accuracy on the part of the WH and the President.

I admit, Amb. Rice became a stooge in the process, but knowingly or not, she conveyed misinformation that had already been stated was not true. She failed to do her due diligence and merely accepted talking points and hit the streets. Unspeakable for any key administrator, much less a potential Secy of State nominee...

Somebody please explain to me what the administration's motives would be to put out false and misleading information about Benghazi. I admit that they probably should have waited a tad bit longer before speaking on this tragedy. but why are republicans trying to make it seem as if this was an intentional act? What would there be to gain? Why are republicans suddenly so anti-country now that there is a Black man in this office? Will they go to the lengths of implicating the administration in the murders? The GOP and those who believe in it,, need Jesus Christ in their lives; very hateful people.

Somebody please explain to me what the administration's motives would be to put out false and misleading information about Benghazi. I admit that they probably should have waited a tad bit longer before speaking on this tragedy. but why are republicans trying to make it seem as if this was an intentional act? What would there be to gain? Why are republicans suddenly so anti-country now that there is a Black man in this office? Will they go to the lengths of implicating the administration in the murders? The GOP and those who believe in it,, need Jesus Christ in their lives; very hateful people.

Somebody please explain to me what the administration's motives would be to put out false and misleading information about Benghazi. I admit that they probably should have waited a tad bit longer before speaking on this tragedy. but why are republicans trying to make it seem as if this was an intentional act? What would there be to gain? Why are republicans suddenly so anti-country now that there is a Black man in this office? Will they go to the lengths of implicating the administration in the murders? The GOP and those who believe in it,, need Jesus Christ in their lives; very hateful people.

1.) You would not be in the News this morning without being a McCain parrot? 2.) No one asked you who you blame for anything? As Herman Cain so aptly said, If you don't like what is going on, "Blame Yourself." 3.) CLEAN HOUSE 2014

Uh oh. Heck didn't read the latest memo from Fox "News". Everything's about Benghazi and Rice is the anti-Christ. Face it, GOP. You lost last week and lost big. Exploiting a tragedy for political gain is abhorrent. Lick your wounds and realize the majority of this country doesn't have the time and patience to deal with your hissy fits anymore. In other words, grow up.

1. The Obama Administrations belief is that Osama is Dead and Alkida is on the run. If they admitted what really happened in Ben Ghazi, then that premise would be false and he would be made out to be the liar in chief that he is. Therefore, the American people had to be told that the whole attack was based on a video and was not pre-planned.

The attackers in Benghazi were not al Qaida. They were Islamist extremists, terrorists, but not al Qaida. What I hear is that this is a group that were ****ed off that Libya wasn't interested in becoming a strict Islamist state, and they blame the US. Plus, a high-ranking member of the group was "disappeared" by the CIA last year, and they had been looking for an opportunity for revenge.

What we are seeing in relation to the tragedy at Benghazi and the folly of Gen. Petraeus is raw demagoguery. The GOP is opportunistically exploiting these events to try to damage the electoral win of Obama, damage the retention of the Senate majority by the Democrats, distract from the quality of victory of the Democrats who have brought more woman and minorities to Congress than ever before, distract from the obvious mandate given to Obama and Congress by We the People to allow the continuation of Bush era tax cuts for 98% of Americans and allow a relatively miniscule increase in taxes for the richest 2% of income over $250K/yr. and distract from the mandate to continue on a path of health care reform.

In effect, the GOP, rather than learning from the Nov 6th election and pursuing collaboration, is doubling down on its strategy of obstructionism. Susan Rice is merely a target du jour for this GOP, a victim of the GOP's political war on Obama and on American liberalism in general. If attacks don't work, distract. If distractions don't work, attack. If discrediting doesn't work, defame. If defamation doesn't work, discredit. Exploit the filibuster to maximum effect. Exploit the rules of the House favoring the majority to maximum effect. And who is hurt by an obstructed American government? Definitely the poor. Definitely the middle class. Who benefits from an obstructed American government? Could it be that the hundreds of millions spent in support of Romney/Ryan and the GOP was not wasted after all but well spent?

This is all Republican doing their 2nd term punishment to a Democratic President. Republicans can't find personal scandal, they can't find fault with anything else, they tried to fry Obama behind any misstep in this Admin, but their tolerance for Republican Administrations goes beyond the peoples' ability to tolerate, and that's why they aren't in office today. Repubs have torn through this Administration like DEA Agents; now, there is a Benghazi tragedy and the republicans can't wait to make a firestorm out of it. They will probably try to take this to impeachment. This is nothing new; it is expected. They sat idly by while Bush allowed Cheney invited in all his corporate lobbyists to infest the Beltway and even the White House partying with all of the Congressional leaders too, but now that there is a Democratic President, the courtesies go away. Shall we name Reagan's sins? (Their god) How about when Congress testified that what we were doing in Nicaragua was basically 'state run terrorism' - why? Because Reagan went into Nicaragua and took out an ELECTED government, a government, the Sandanistas, who believed in education, supporting their people, but unfortunately, the Nicaragua government wasn't what reagan preferred, so he went armed an opposition to get them out. . When the World Council found the U.S. breached International Law,they fined us over $3Billion and Reagan basically gave them the finger. Casper Weinberger was found to have illegally run the Iran-Contra Casper Weinberger then Secretary of Defense during Iran-Contra. In June 1992 he was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of concealing from congressional investigators and prosecutors thousands of pages of his handwritten notes. Raymond Donovan, Secretary of Labor for Reagan indicted for defrauding the New York City Transit Authority of $7.4. million. Elliott Abrams was appointed by President Reagan in 1985 to head the State Department's Latin American Bureau. He was closely linked with ex-White House aide Lt. Col. Oliver North's covert movement to aid the Contras. Working for North, Abrams coordinated inter-agency support for the contras and helped solicit illegal funding from foreign powers as well as domestic contributors. Abrams agreed to cooperate with Iran-Contra investigators and pled guilty to two charges reduced to misdemeanors. He was sentenced in 1991 to two years probation and 100 hours of community service but was pardoned by President George Bush. Edwin Gray, Chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank was charged with illegally repaying himself and his wife $26,000 in travel costs.Max Hugel, CIA chief of covert operations who resigned after allegations of fraudulent financial dealings. And Reagan has been deified by these people. That should help put things in perspective.all